New EU data laws started today and complaints have already been made against Google and Facebook.

[Qwickshot]

Everyone in the EU had been getting emails from every company they have signed up to in the past informing us of their updated privacy policy and trying to get us to opt in to marketing in preparation for GDPR which came into effect today 25/05/2018. Non EU citizens have likely been getting them too.

 

GDPR is the EU's new flagship regulation designed to limit companies power over your data and how they can use it. It also is enforced by huge fines of up to 4% of a companies global turnover.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44252327

 

Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws on the first day the came into effect.

 

Quote

Complaints have been filed against Facebook, Google, Instagram and WhatsApp within hours of the new GDPR data protection law taking effect.

The companies are accused of forcing users to consent to targeted advertising to use the services.

Privacy group noyb.eu led by activist Max Schrems said people were not being given a "free choice".

If the complaints are upheld, the websites may be forced to change how they operate, and they could be fined.

What's the issue?

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a new EU law that changes how personal data can be collected and used. Even companies based outside the EU must follow the new rules if offering their services in the EU.

In its four complaints, noyb.eu argues that the named companies are in breach of GDPR because they have adopted a "take it or leave it approach".

 

The activist group says customers must agree to having their data collected, shared and used for targeted advertising, or delete their accounts.

This, the organisation suggests, falls foul of the new rules because forcing people to accept wide-ranging data collection in exchange for using a service is prohibited under GDPR.

"The GDPR explicitly allows any data processing that is strictly necessary for the service - but using the data additionally for advertisement or to sell it on needs the users' free opt-in consent," said noyb.eu in a statement.

"GDPR is very pragmatic on this point: whatever is really necessary for an app is legal without consent, the rest needs a free 'yes' or 'no' option."

Privacy advocate Max Schrems said: "Many users do not know yet that this annoying way of pushing people to consent is actually forbidden under GDPR in most cases."

 

Also sites that are not targeted at EU citizens (such as US news outlets) are starting to block EU citizens from accessing their services though fear of being fined by the EU. 

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44248448

 

Quote

A number of high-profile US news websites are temporarily unavailable in Europe after new European Union rules on data protection came into effect.

The Chicago Tribune and LA Times were among those posting messages saying they were currently unavailable in most European countries.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) gives EU citizens more rights over how their information is used.

The measure is an effort by EU lawmakers to limit tech firms' powers.

 

 

[samcool55]

Well, this was to be expected. I won't be surprised if nobody at facebook exactly knows where all the data of everyone is going to and how it's all connected.

 

edit: funny detail. If a non-eu company has data from eu citizens. And they deny access now like LA times, they are also violating the GDPR because you need to be able to ask them to delete everything.

 

[Doobeedoo]

Well well what a surprise. 

[JuztBe]

So now it's either leave or share data. What if options were share data or pay subscription fee, would that comply with GDPR? 

[Mihle]

I don't see the point of us news sites blocking EU citizens. Can't they just not collect any more info other than the number that visits and be ok (not linked to those that visit)? 

[laminutederire]

1 minute ago, Fooshi said:

If they can't data mine you to shit for revenue, you're essentially just wasting their bandwidth. We can't have any of that now, can we?

They can still garner revenues through advertising the old fashion way though. That does not necessitate tracking of any sorts.

[Cheezdoodlez]

My dear newpage-extension for Chrome Toby is also doing a "opt in or gtfo!" thing.  Haven't decided what action I will take put probably delete my account and file a complaint and find another new page extension..

[Mihle]

4 hours ago, Fooshi said:

If they can't data mine you to shit for revenue, you're essentially just wasting their bandwidth. We can't have any of that now, can we?

They only really need the number of visitors to get add money right?

[Kamjam21xx]

Well well well, what do we have here?

[Mr.Humble]

Oh this is going to be fun.

Especially with Facebook as Zuckerberg really didn't impress the MEP's very much on his hearing.

[NMS]

6 hours ago, Cheezdoodlez said:

My dear newpage-extension for Chrome Toby is also doing a "opt in or gtfo!" thing.  Haven't decided what action I will take put probably delete my account and file a complaint and find another new page extension..

-snip-

The fact that you have to agree to receive spam emails to use something is fucked up.

[Christophe Corazza]

8 hours ago, Qwickshot said:

Also sites that are not targeted at EU citizens (such as US news outlets) are starting to block EU citizens from accessing their services though fear of being fined by the EU. 

Unfortunately, I've noticed it today as well.

Certain US sites simply blocked me 

Their "agree to our ToS or get the F**k out" policy is simply ridiculous.

[Christophe Corazza]

4 minutes ago, NMS said:

The fact that you have to agree to receive spam emails to use something is fucked up.

 

In theory, @Cheezdoodlez could simply accept it and afterwards simply block the incoming emails (spam filter).

That being said, he shouldn't be obliged to accept it in the first place if he doesn't want to.

[Qwickshot]

51 minutes ago, Christophe Corazza said:

Their "agree to our ToS or get the F**k out" policy is simply ridiculous.

Not sure I agree, you don't have to use their service nor is it a public service (aka state funded for all citizens). Your choice is to use the service or not.

49 minutes ago, Christophe Corazza said:

 

In theory, @Cheezdoodlez could simply accept it and afterwards simply block the incoming emails (spam filter).

That being said, he shouldn't be obliged to accept it in the first place if he doesn't want to.

Again your not obliged to use the service if you don't like the conditions you are signing up to. Companies that offer the 'free' model have to generate revenue somehow. Targeted ads are worth so much more $ than generic ones to the sites that serve them.

 

Would you pay actual $ every week or month to use it? Imagine you had to pay for every site and service used online, it would add up real fast and people would just move back to the free option if it still existed.

 

[Cheezdoodlez]

51 minutes ago, NMS said:

The fact that you have to agree to receive spam emails to use something is fucked up.

 

44 minutes ago, Christophe Corazza said:

 

In theory, @Cheezdoodlez could simply accept it and afterwards simply block the incoming emails (spam filter).

That being said, he shouldn't be obliged to accept it in the first place if he doesn't want to.

Yeah. I could just block it but the fact they leave me no choice to opt-out of receiving spam is bullshit. Sad to see my absolut favourite extension go. I guess I could file a complaint to someone official and/or write to the developers telling them they are breaching GDPR but I dont think it will get anywhere but a response from the devs "dont like it? fuck off!"

[Cheezdoodlez]

2 minutes ago, Qwickshot said:

Not sure I agree, you don't have to use their service nor is it a public service (aka state funded for all citizens). Your choice is to use the service or not.

Again your not obliged to use the service if you don't like the conditions you are signing up to. Companies that offer the 'free' model have to generate revenue somehow. Targeted ads are worth so much more $ than generic ones to the sites that serve them.

 

Would you pay actual $ every week or month to use it? Imagine you had to pay for every site and service used online, it would add up real fast and people would just move back to the free option if it still existed.

 

if you re-read the OP you can clearly see that this is in violation of the new GDPR, hence the lawsuits against Facebook and google.

[laminutederire]

2 minutes ago, Qwickshot said:

Not sure I agree, you don't have to use their service nor is it a public service (aka state funded for all citizens). Your choice is to use the service or not.

Again your not obliged to use the service if you don't like the conditions you are signing up to. Companies that offer the 'free' model have to generate revenue somehow. Targeted ads are worth so much more $ than generic ones to the sites that serve them.

 

Would you pay actual $ every week or month to use it? Imagine you had to pay for every site and service used online, it would add up real fast and people would just move back to the free option if it still existed.

 

They can generate cash in many ways other than by using pervasively data.

I'm not really sure it's really more juicy for companies to do targeted ads. I am fairly confident that normal ads work just as well as targeted ones. Solely because normal ones target websites for what they display, so you can still get your ad to the right people anyway.

Targeted ads are probably just a made up way to make extra cash for something that'll have the same return value anyway.

The only difference is how intrusive Google and the likes are with everyone s privacy.

[Syntaxvgm]

I had to write this brief privacy policy last weekend for work

[PocketNerd]

There was a mini-discussion at work on whether we had to worry about the GDPR if we're using a mailing list through mailchimp. Still couldn't come up with a verdict, though I have seen emails from lists I subscribe to that ask you to update your settings.

[Syntaxvgm]

Just now, VegetableStu said:

image broken for me ._.

it's uploaded to the forums wtf lol here's a different one 

[Christophe Corazza]

47 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

I had to write this brief privacy policy last weekend for work

 

6 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

it's uploaded to the forums wtf lol here's a different one 

 

- snip -

 

Not readable

 

Wouldn't call this brief though 

[Syntaxvgm]

1 minute ago, Christophe Corazza said:

 

 

Not readable

 

Wouldn't call this brief though 

Not meant to be readable, lol I dont want to link where I work to a shitposting account on a forum 

[Christophe Corazza]

3 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

Not meant to be readable, lol I dont want to link where I work to a shitposting account on a forum 

Already figured that out 

[GDRRiley]

5 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

Not meant to be readable, lol I dont want to link where I work to a shitposting account on a forum 

mods can get you location or IP which will then allow them to know where you are logged in from, i'm almost certain you logged into it a work at least once. 

[Syntaxvgm]

4 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

mods can get you location or IP which will then allow them to know where you are logged in from, i'm almost certain you logged into it a work at least once. 

into a work? 

Yes, I dont always use a vpn at work. No, I don't care. The mods aren't gonna go posting where I work all over the forum for giggles. I'm pretty sure with some work anyone can dox this name. Just dont literally wanna post my PP on here lol. 

And the location they would get would lead them to my city not my work lol